i mean… compare it with Leopart 2A4 and you`ll get why…
it lacks mobility, turret rotation and vertical aim speed, has longer reload even tho it has autoloader, it has poor aim angles which is REALLY bad at that BR, it has random (if not just BAD) damage, and it also lacks survivability. Sure some cannons of same rank wont pen its hull (L7 on M1 Abrams for example), but then some of them pen it straight to hull (nearly all 120mm shots, L7 with M900 or DM63, ect), and the damage it takes is much more lethal than leopard usually gets.
2 Likes
Armour? It has the armour of a 9.3 tank with K1 ontop. It’s contemporaries can literally UFP it.
3 Likes
i have changed my opinion quite a bit since august 23rd 2023
Also how did this get somewhat brought back alive
i forgot that i even made this post
1 Like
I just want to say - i absolutely have very negative emotions toward people who gaslighted me over and over, telling me that turms is good, that it should even be 10.3, that it is “one of the best tanks on it’s BR”, and that Leo2s are not better etc.
I’ve picked up leo2prem and suddenly game at ~10BR became fun. Like i’m playing different game now.
I’ve also reached T80B and i can already feel that it is more user friendly (but i played 1 or 2 battles with it)
Turms is absolutely miserable. I can even imagine what kind of masochists would play the tech tree t72s that doesn’t even have thermals like turms.
BTW, weren’t 3bm42 mango “too long” to fit into real life turms autoloader? I would gladly see the 3bm42 be taken away from turms and it BR lowered
1 Like
So, usually, those who offer it to new players say that, but they do not think about the fact that the tank should be for growth. Turms forgives some mistakes, but the gameplay is really boring. Merkava and DS will be noticeably more fun as the first tank.
Turms CAN be a good vehicle. But it is NOT user friendly.
Why is it not user friendly?
Slow, poor acceleration, poor mobility, bad armor (armor from 9.3 t72), no reverse gear
Indeed. That tank is a total piece of trash. Pure junk tbh
It’s fine.
finna be real here, if this was added to italian tt (technically could have been with turms and all) this 100% would have been 10.7 or 11.0. Ariete P is 10.7 with worse armor (yes its worse bro), similiar shell (BM42/DM33). Ariete P actually has worse optics due to it having the 90s italian optics (same on centauro 105) which is really ironic.
The only bad thing about the 72av is that its a t72, same people hate the frame but I for one can easily bring my hungarian 72m1 up to my 10.0 line up and it honestly is more reliable sometimes than the dardo, im able to be okay even at 10.7, 11.0 uptiers. If i do my 9.7 lineup and get downtier to 8.7 in a t72, it doesnt matter im literally going to decimate the enemy team. The fact that the 72av is .3 above, and is a really modernized variant is actually criminal. Id be fine if it got bm22, but bm42, gen 2 optics, era (yes this is actually effective at a tier crazy with helicopters and can be effective against LGBs).
In my opinion, composite armor has no business below 10.0 (like MBT composites), and in a case like the t72av I think it should be at least 10.3, if not 10.7, which I believe should be the same for t72bs which are wayyyyy better. Dont even get me started on the T90A. If you say its somehow bad or has a hard time, mobility whatever, ion gaf because if it were me I could decimate fields with those tanks.
*edit, just checked wiki and the t72a/m1 is 9.3, my bad ive been playing it a 9.7. Honestly at this point I dont know what to say
Just acknowledge it’s bad, the T-72AV (Turms-T) is bad, not because is bad as it’s but because it’s a Premium and there are people that still buy it, it’s sad to see people paying a Premium vehicle so bad that with the same amount converted in Golden Eagles you can get a better vehicle in the same battle rating.
If it was a tech tree vehicle I wouldn’t mind but as a Premium it doesn’t work anymore, a future compensation for whoever bought the T-72AV (Turms-T) would be very welcome and eventually removing it from sale or moving it as a tech tree vehicle which could serve as great improvement for USSR’s T-72B which lacks proper sight for its battle rating.
1 Like
Buddy what are you even saying? the av is a full br over the t72m1…
It already is, it been there eversince the october br changes last year
1 Like
The AV is 10.3… this post is years old.
damn right it is and i have since they slightly changed my position
Thats insane take if i ever saw one
1 Like
CV90 105 TML was removed for similar reason, it was so bad that it was removed and if I’m not wrong the players that bought that was compensated, then it was replaced by the CV90 105 XC-8, I’m not considering the accuracy issues with the vehicle.
Uhhh, no. The CV90105 TML was exceptional ingame.
But it didn’t have a stabiliser in real life. So rather than removing the stabiliser ingame and making a lot of the buyers angry, they instead upgraded it to the XC-8 version.
Previously with the Italian M60 premium, they removed a stabiliser it shouldn’t have had, and the playerbase threw a fit. Guess they didn’t want a repeat of that.
1 Like
really now? IIRC the CV90 105TML wasnt removed becasue poor capability, it was removed as being grossly historically inaccurate.
1 Like
Yes, yes. I’m sorry maybe I got confused and replied with wrong information.